[Federal Register: September 30, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 189)]
[Notices]
[Page 56329]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30se03-119]
[[Page 56329]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-52,039]
Heraeus Electro-Nite Company, Philadelphia, PA; Notice of
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of July 31, 2003, a company official requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the
subject firm. The denial notice was signed on July 14, 2003, and
published in the Federal Register on August 5, 2003 (68 FR 46230).
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under
the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously considered
that the determination complained of was erroneous;
(2) If it appears that the determination complained of was based on
a mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered; or
(3) If in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the
decision.
The petition for the workers of Heraeus Electro-Nite Company,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania was denied because the ``contributed
importantly'' group eligibility requirement of Section 222(3) of the
Trade Act of 1974, was not met, nor was there a shift in production to
a foreign source. The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally
demonstrated through a survey of customers of the workers' firm. The
survey revealed that none of the respondents increased their purchases
of imported molten metal sensors. The company did not import molten
metal sensors, nor did they shift production abroad during the relevant
period.
In the request for reconsideration, the company official contests
the negative decision on the basis that ``the increasing amount of
foreign steel being sent to this country has caused a number of major
steel companies to declare bankruptcy, which has shrunk our business.''
The official appears to be claiming that, because the subject firm
business depends completely on U.S. steel production, the subject firm
workers are import impacted through this association.
When addressing the issue of import impact, the Department is
directed by the Trade Act to consider imports of products ``like or
directly competitive'' in the case of primary impacted firms, or
whether the subject firm supplied a component in a product produced by
a trade certified firm in the case of secondary impact. As neither the
subject firm nor its major declining customers reported imports like or
directly competitive with the molten metal sensors produced at the
subject firm, primary import impact did not occur. As the subject firm
did not produce a component used in the products of their customers,
the possibility of secondary import impact is equally invalid.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings, I
conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law
or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department
of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied.
Signed at Washington, DC this 22nd day of August 2003.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-24697 Filed 9-29-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P